ML20137F200

Rev 0 to Check Valve Design Application Review

ML20137F200
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	06/30/1990
From:	GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH, INC. (FORMERLY GILBERT ASSOCIAT
To:
Shared Package
ML20137F155	List: B16358, Forwards Addl Info on Selected Items of Work Previously Performed by Util,Correction to Slide Presentation & Resumes for Contractor Selection for ICAVP ML20137F157 ML20137F167 ML20137F189 ML20137F200
References
NUDOCS 9704010009
Download: ML20137F200 (42)

Text

.-_-_._--_ ---- .-.--_ - _ . - - - . . - -

i

!O i

i i

) MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 2 l

NORTHEAST UTILITIES SERVICE COMPANY 1

i i

CHECK VALVE DESIGN APPLICATION REVIEW i

i lO i l I

r # i m "?

i i

i 1

\

Re *

...y. :s

"World Class Valve Engineering" i

1' i by

O

' ff alibert/ Commonwealth,Inc.

- Q% .n in n .ne . ui m m a . 4 n..r.nniri..ni.

j $$0*

P J AS$E oENf3 6

. ..- __- - . . ~ . - . . - - . -.-.. . . . . . . . ~ - . . . . _ . . - . . .

4 e .

j I

RECORD OF REVISIONS [

1 MSION ud1E SECTIONS REVISED i

O June,1990 OriginalIssue J

4 a

b k

3 ih i

q-i i

3 4

1

(

1 4

5 l

• 1 i

I l

4 i

i-4 i

e easp i

Section Pare (s) l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AND METHODOLOGY 1 1.1 OBJECITVE 1

~

1.2 SELECTION OF SYSTEMS 1 '

13 SELECTION OF FLOWPATHS AND VALVES 2 4

1.4 BASIS FOR CATEGORIZING CHECK VALVES 3 1.4.1 Valve Type 4 1.4.2 Flow Conditions 4 1.43 Piping Arrangement 7 1.4.4 Maintenance History 7 1.4.5 Summary 8

l (including general criteria forprioritization) l 1.5 BASIS FOR GROUPING, INSPECTION SAMPLE SIZE, AND FREQUENCY 9 i 1.6 BASIS FOR VALVE INSPECTION CRITERIA,

AND CORRECTIVE ACTION 10 2.0 SYSTEM FLOW PATHS 1 l

2.1 SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAMS 1 2.1.1 Table 2.1, "Index ofSys,em Flow Paths Included in Review" 1

!O 3.0 2.1.2 Simpiiried Flow Diagrams 2-7

SUMMARY

OF ANALYSIS 1 l 3.1 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 1 Table 3.1, "Pdority 1 Valve Son" 2pages Table 5 2, "Pdority 2 Valve Son" 3pages Table 3.3, "Prionty 3 Valve Son" 3pages l Table 3.4, " System / Valve Index to Data Sheets" 3pages APPENDIX A: Check Valve Data Sheets

+

APPENDIX B: Inspection Requirements B.I.0 Background 1 B.2.0 Objective 1 f

B3.0 Check Valve Inspection 2 B.4.0 Check Valve Inspection Guidelines 3 (miscellaneous inspection criteria)

B.5.0 Corrective Action 14 Table B.1, " Priority 1 Groupings rInspection" 2pages Table B.2, " Priority 2 Groupi,ngs rInspection" 4pages Table B.3, " Priority 3 Groupmgs rInspection" 3pages APPENDIX C: References J

i

t MILLSTONE UNIT'IWO i

• CHECK VALVE DESIGN APPLICATION REVIEW t b

i 3

L 1.0 - INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY I i

! ' 1.1 OBJECTIVE ,

Provide a design application review for critical check valves installed in -

Millstone Unit 2 and establish an inspection priority for each valve. l 1

Check valves are used in many nuclear power plant systems related to safety, i availability and reliability. Failure of any of these valves could lead to overpressurization of upstream systems, water hammer and resulting component damage, or flow blockage. As check valves are not often disassembled and inspected, deterioration leading to failure may not be discovered and the failure itself could go unnoticed for a time thus adding to the severity of the failure consequences. The " Application Guidelines for Check Valves in Nuclear Power Plants" issued by EPRI in January 1988 concludes that '

the two most likely causes of check valve damage are insuf5cient flow velocity  !

and turbulent flow caused by upstream piping components. {

Critical check valves should be periodically inspected so that incipient failures  :

can be detected. Since it is not practical to disassemble and inspect every check -  !

valve at every outage, the most important systems and valves must be identified '

and a basis established to prioritize the valves for inspection. '

i 1.2 SELECTION OF SYSTEMS )

1.2.1 The following systems included in this review are the systems identified in INPO i SOER 86-3. Because ofindustry experience, the SOER considers that valves m i these systems should be included in the program.

{

Main Steam ChemicalAnd Volume Contro!

NuclearService Water DieselAirStart Main Feedwater Low Pressure SafetyInjection AuxiliaryFeedwater (includes Shutdown Cooling) 0 1-1 1

d 1

! 1.2.2 - Additional systems have been included because they are Nuclear Safety Related and influence plant reliability. They are not primary shutdown systems though

.~ ,

some can act as alternate shutdown systems.

4:

OtherSafetyinjection Sub-Systems

-(High besswe Safetyinjection)

(Si Tank System)

Contamment Spmy l ReactorBuilding Closed Cooling Water j (ABCCW) 1 IJ SELECTION OF FIhWPATHS AND VALVES i IJ.1 All the check valves in the 10 systems listed in Section 1.2 have been included in the review with only the exceptions listed below. For the purposes of this review the system alpha prefixt e.g. SI, FW, DG; has been used to define the i valves in each system.

1.3.2 Charring Svilfm - Check Valve 2-CH-435 is not included because flow through it is prevented by locked closed valve 2-CH-434. Check valve 2-CH-112 is not l

included because it is in the H2 and N2 supply to the VCT. This line is only used l 1 to fill the VCT and is normally isolated by closed valves 2-CH-107 and 109. '

! 1.3.3 Boric Acid System - Only the Cowpaths which provide boric acid to the  !

Charging Pumps' suction are included, since this is the emergency function of ,

this system. This flowpath includes check valves 2-CH-154,155, and 177 in the  !

Boric Acid Pump discharge to the Charging Pumps and 2 CH-190 in the gravity feed from the Boric Acid Tank to the Charging Pumps. The flowpath from the Boric Acid Pumps to the Volume Control Tank with check valves 2-CH 186 and 2-CH 188 is not included because it is not the direct path for boric acid injection i via the Charging Pumps.

IJ.4 Saferv Infection Tanks - Check valves in the N2 supply lines are not included l because once the tanks are pressurized these valves are isolated and perform no  ;

function in the operation of the Safety Injection Tanks. '

1.3.5 Containment Sprav - Check valves 2-CS-10B,11,12,26, and 38 are not included l because they are located in circulating, test, and fill lines to the RWST. They  ;

are not in the principal flowpath of Containment Spray and are not required for Containment Spray to perform its emergency function.  !

11.3.6 Main Steam - Check valve 2-MS-366 is not included as it is a 3/4" valve in a drain from a steam trap and its function is not critical to the operation of the system.

1.3.7 Feedwater- Check valves 2-FW-16A/B are not included because they are 1" valves for hydrazine injection and are isolated from flow by locked closed valves 2-FW-15A/B. Check valve 1-FW-53 is not included because it is a 1" valve and Q not in the principal system flowpath.

1-2

1.3.8 Service Water - Check valves 2-SW-6 and 2-SW-9 are not included since they .

are in discharge lines from non-safety systems to the S.W. discharge conduit.

O. raer re et resuirea to f=nction i the emerse ev -eae. vaives 2.Sw.163, 164, and 17 are not included because they are not necessary for system operation.

1.3.9 Diesel Generator Staning Air - Check valves 2-DG-32A, B, C, and D are not included because their internals have been removed per note 2 on P&ID 25203-26018 Sht 1. Check valves 2-DG 37A, B, C, and D; 2-DG-41; and 2-DG-42 are in supply lines to the Startiny Air Tanks. The supply lines are not required for diesel operation since sufficicut air is stored in the Starting Air Tanks to start the diesels. Since these check valves are involved with five separate sources of supply air, it is unlikely that all sources would be interrupted at once. Even if this happened, the tanks are monitored so that a loss of pressure in any of the tanks would be immediately known and necessary actions taken.

1.3.10 Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water - Check valves 2 RB-38,40,42,45,47, and 49 are not included. These are all 1/2" valves with two in the flow indicating loop for each R.B.C.C.W. pump. They are not required for system operation.

1.3.11 Flow diagrams showing the flow paths and check valves included in this review are provided in Section 2.0.

1.3.12 This report shall be revised for any modifications or changes in procedures that O. may have an impact on any of the check valves included in this report. Any check valves that are added to any of the systems shall also be added to the report if they meet the guidelines to be included. Examples of changes that should result in revisions are:

Installation of a new check valve in one ofthe systems included in the xport.

- Replacement of an existing check valve with one of a different Ope or sise.

- A chang to the system operating conditions that may chang theflow rate through the valve.

- Permanent removal of a check valw orits inkmals.

1.4 BASIS FOR CATEGORIZING CHECK VALVES Since it is not practical to disassemble and inspect all the check valves covered by this review in any one outage, it is necessary to categorize the valves and establish priorities so that the limited time and resources available for check valve inspection can be spent on those valves more likely to be experiencing excessive wear or other damage which could in time result in failure of the valve to perform its function. There are four parameters considered in the categorization: valve type, service flow velocity, piping arrangement and maintenance history. The inspection priorities are tabularized in Section 3.0 0 a re sivea o the i aivia#>> veive a t sheets it caea i= ^ rgenatx ^.

1-3

k 1.4.1 Valve Tyne

', The check valves covered by this review fall into one of four basic types: swing, hS tilting disc, lift (includes stop-check), and dual plate. Because of its widespread use in the nuclear power industry, the swing check valve type is the most studied. The greater part of the EPRI Report NP 5479 " Application Guidelines for Check Valves in NuclearPowerPlants"is concerned with swing check valves. Attention has been focused to a lesser extent on tilting disc and lift check valve types, and almost not at all on dual plate types. This review follows the guidelines as it applies to the various types, and also extrapolates conclusions on one type of valve to another type when it is reasonable to do so.

1.4.2 Flow Conditions l

Swing check valves are sensitive to flow velocity and most vendors suggest a i recommended velocity range, or at least a minimum recommended velocity, for their valves. Within the recommended range, the disc should be firmly seated ,

against its stop. At flow velocities below the recommended range, the flow will  ;

not be sufficient to hold the disc against its stop and the disc will tend to " flutter" and perhaps tap against its stop. Due to the added motion, this fluttering will result in higher than normal wear to the moving parts of the valve,i.e., the hinge shaft or its bushings and the hinge arm or hinge support, whichever is moving relative to the shaft. The gradual wear due to friction will increase clearances and this may eventually result in the disc and hinge arm assembly cocking and binding.

1 f' l AA A AA I W AAN\ W A1 i 7' ok s

- . . . , n- ....... . . .

l TypicalMng Oeck Valve l Figure 1.4.2.1 Some check valve designs use a two-piece disc and hinge arm assembly.

Prolonged tapping in this type of valve can result in damage to the disc stud and i may contribute to enlarging the disc stud's hole in the hinge arm, creating additional and unwanted freedom of motion for the disc. Tapping can also

-3 transmit forces to the hinge pin and its support with possible adverse O consequences such as accelerated wear and fatigue.

1-4 i

At velocities above the recommended range, turbulence in the valve body becomes severe and can cause unwanted disc motion with many of the same consequences described for the low velocity case.

The recommended velocities used for this study were those compiled for the EPRI guidelines. The experimental results reported in the EPRI guidelines seem to indicate that the manufacturer's recommended velocities may be on the low side. The Pacific valves tested required velocities of as much as 16 ft./sec.

to achieve full disc opening with the as rnanufactured full-open disc an6 1e as opposed to Pacific's recommended minimum velocity of 55 M approx 2mately 7 ft./sec.). The EPRI testing also showed that the velocity requ(ired for fu lift decreases dramatically as the full-open disc angle is decreased by lengthening the disc stop.

It should be noted, however, that the recommended flow velocities may not apply precisely to any specific valve. The internal configuration of the valve body, the shape of the disc and the disc's weight will differ from one valve size to another, from one pressure class to another, and especially from one vendor to another. For any one valve, its individual characteristics and the sersice it sees may give it a flow velocity envelope slightly different than the one recommended. Nonetheless, the manufacturer's recommended velocities are useful reference points for selecting valves deserving closer attention.

TypicalliftingDisc Valns Figwe M.2.2 O

I i:.

u os-

. L.e::

5:D f ///A V///// ,

l i

I Tilting disc check valves are designed to achieve full disc lift at lower fluid velocities than swing check valves. Recent valve designs by Rockwell and Anchor / Darling utilize a dynamic lift created by the disc shape to increase the disc opening forces at low velocities. However, the older Crane style of tilting disc valve may not show as much of that effect. The testing performed by EPRI in preparation of the check valve application guidelines did not include tilting disc valves so there is no check on the manufacturer's recommendations.

O 1-5  !

l

o (TT ' iTT b \ '

R~

f . .. . .~: T r- '' ~.....

i TypicalLift Check Valve Figure 1.4.23 Lift check valves are even less sensitive to low Dow conditions. Although the velocity required for full disc lift is not much different from other check valve types, the simplicity of the valve, which ordinarily only has one moving part, seems to make the lift check type less prone to failure. Anchor / Darling states that operation in the partially open conditions at flow velocities as low as 1.5 ft./sec. are acceptable. As in the case of tilting disc valves, the EPRI testing did not include lift check valves.

O -

y

/6 ..

$ i ,, (3l

_ op - . .._._.

g _...... g.. , ...... ...

v .! D i

i ii i

TypicalDualPlate Check Valve Figure 1.4.2.4 Dual plate check valves were not addressed by the EPRI guidelines. It is  !

reasonable to assume, however, especially as there is some supporting empirical evidence, that dual plate check valves can be adversely affected by fluid p velocities less than that required to hold the valve fully open and by turbulence V in the flow similarly to other types of check valves. The minimum required i

velocity for full plate opening was calculated based on information provided by the largest manufacturer of dual plate check valves - TRW Mission.

1-6

i l 1

i l

i 1.4.3 Pining Arranoement The piping arrangement immediately upstream of the check valve is shown j

graphically on the data sheet (in Appendix A) by a copy of the appropriate part i

of the piping isometric or arrangement drawing. De piping arrangement is important because it is the flowing fluid which imparts motion to the moving parts of the check valve and valves are designed on the assumption of symmetric velocity distribution over the valve's cross section. An asymmetric velocity distribution caused by a nearby elbow, for example, could result in uneven wear i of the moving parts due to the off-center thrust on the disc. Additionally, the l turbulence caused by an upstream fitting or device could also result in the

! flutter and tapping discussed in Paragraph 1.4.2.

4  ;

Testing performed as part of the EPRI application guidelines project has shown

[ that the flow disturbance caused by a 90 elbow does not significantly affect the performance of a check valve provided the elbow is located more than five diameters upstream of the valve. Tees were not tested but are expected to have only slightly more effect than elbows.

[

' The testing also found that the turbulence caused by a throttled butterfly valve, and by extension a control valve or pump, takes up to ten diameters to dissipate.

This review follows the EPRI guidelines and uses the distances of five diameters from tees and elbows and ten diameters from control valves, orifices and pumps as the cut-off for determining the possible existence of turbulence detrimental to the valve.

Lift and piston check valves are assumed to be less affected by piping arrangement since the flow path inside the valve body has sharp bends of its own, but credit is not generally taken for this.

1.4.4 Maintenance History De maintenance records for the check valves in this review were reviewed and items which described effects on valve operation or damage to valve internals I have been included on the data sheets and considered in the prioritization of the valve.

1

)

a 1-7 ,

I

]

1A.5 Summarv j The last item on the data sheets (Appendix A) is a summary discussion of the above parameters and how they affect the valve.  ;

I Each valve is given an " Inspection Priority" from 1 to 4, where 1 is highest i priority. The priority is a subjective ranking of each valve based on valve type,  :

function, piping arrangements and service conditions.

The general criteria for the four priorities are:

Pdodty 1: Flow wlocity is ouvide recommended rang in one or more modes of operation and upsaram piping arranyment may create signipcantflow disturbances.

Pdodty 2: Flow nlocity is outside recommended rang in one or more modes of operation, or upstream piping arranyment may create signipcantflow disturbances. Also included are valves which otherwise would quahfyfor Priority 1, but which experienceflow only occasionally.

Pdodty 3: Flow wiocity is within recommended rany; upstream piping is straight and ursobstructedforSw or ten diameters as appropriate. Also included are w!ves which would otherwise quahfyfor Prionty 2, but which experienceflow only occasionally.

Pdodty 4: Vahts with this priority are isolatedfrom flow in all normal and test modes.

Priorities on specific valves may be adjusted due to special circumstances. For l example, a valve with a history of mechanical failure would be given a higher priority.

1.4.5.1 EXPLANATION OF TERhfS:

Flow velocitvt The valves' flow velocities are calculated from the volumetric i flow rate divided by the flow area. Where the valve outline drawing gives the valve port diameter, that dimension is used to determine the flow area, otherwise the nominal pipe diameter is used. i I

Flow in verticalvalvest The correction factor for vertical installation as given in EPRI Application Guideline 23.2 (Ref 2) has been used for swing check and tilting valves. The Guideline does not apply to lift check valves, which are inappropriate for installation in venical lines unless spring assisted.

Flow velocity recommended range: The recommended range is the range of flow velocities in which the valve disc is stable, i.e. not fluttering. The lower end of the range is determined from the formula V,,w, = C,/V, where C is a constant supplied by the valve manufacturer, and Vis the specific volume of the fluid in cubic feet per pound in accordance with Section 3.2 of the EPRI Guidelines (Ref. 2). The upper limit on the range is 25 feet per second. ,

(Section 33 of Ref. 2).

O ,

1-8

Upstream piping arranrement: Turbulence is considered to have an effect on the valve if:

1. An elbow or see is located less thanjfw diameters upstream of the check valve, or

2. *lhe check valw is located less than ten diametersfrom a conovi valve, pump, or orifice. (Ref2, Application Guideline 2.3.1)

Occarional flow: Flowpaths which function only post-accident (except for

periodic surveillance testing) are considered to have occasional flow. Those

flowpaths which function during normal power operation, including start up and shutdown, are treated as having continuous flow.

t Mechanicalfailure: In reviewing the valves' maintenance histories attention was concentrated on problems having a direct impact on the ability of the valve to operate. Thus, reported abnormal wear of moving parts, cracking or failure

ofinternal parts, or loss ofinternal parts, were considered significant. Minor i damage to the exterior of the valve, packing or gasket leakage, or repairs to externally mounted actuators or limit switches were not considered significant.

In addition, valve seat leakage, unless associated with other problems, is considered a normal maintenance item and not significant to this study.

Special circumstances: Any special circumstances having an effect on a valve's priority are identified on the applicable valve data sheet. Examples of such circumstancer are: recent surveillance, nitrogen service, and industry experience with some applications, i.e. Diesel Air Start valves.

O j 1.5 BASIS FOR GROUPING, INSPECTION SAMPLE SIZE AND FREQUENCY There are 99 valves under review so it is unwieldy to specify a single inspection 4

frequency, even for each inspection priority, as it may result in some valve types not being inspected for a long period of time. Since it often happens that the same make and model of valve will see the same service in different branches of I the same system,it makes sense to group these similar valves for inspection purposes. By inspecting a sample of valves from each group, all the different

! valve types and applications can be efficiently inspected in the shortest time. A listing of valve groups is included in Appendix B.

j For Priority 1 valves, the basis for grouping is that a group v41i consist of valves with the same size, vendor, model, and service. This is a rigorous basis for grouping, but it is justified, since the Priority 1 valves have been judged to be  !

l the most likely to suffer wear and degradation and no variable should be i ignored. __

It is felt that a period of three fuel cycles is the most time that ought to be

, allowed for inspection of all the Priority 1 valves. Thus, the valves should be

inspected within three fuel cycles.

l 1-9

l The groups for Priority 2 and 3 valves are based on priority, vendor and type.

As valves in these priority levels have been judged to be at less risk than the Priority 1 valves, the frequency ofinspection can be reduced. Valves in O Priority 2 should be subject to disassembly and visual inspection within four fuel cycles.

Valves in Priority 3 groups should be subjected to disassembly and visual inspection within a period of five fuel cycles.

Inspection of Priority 4 valves is not required since by definition these valves do not see flow.

1.5 BASIS FOR VALVE INSPECTION CRITERIA AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS The Inspection Requirements and recommended corrective action are presented in Appendix B. These are based on the findings of EPRI Report 1 NP-5479 which considered both historical experience with check valve degradation and failure and theoretical modes of degradation. The EPRI Report identifies places to look at and things to look for when inspecting check valves and this advice has been considered in formulating the inspection guidelines given in Appendix B.

O  !

I I

i l

O 1-10

l i

t 1 i a

s 1

! l Docket No. 50-336 i B16358 i I .

g- l 1 e s

i I >

i t

i i

! l i l'

! i j- i

+- t 1

i- l i.

!, Attachment 2 i

t

Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 l

i Correction to Presentation Slides k

i f I

a

! 4 i l i '

i i

l l

i 1-

}.

E I

i March 1997 3

d l

1 I

. , _ - _ . , - - . _ , _ - - , , _ , - . . . ~ . - . .-.--.. _ _ ._. - . . _ _ . . - - - , . - .

o o o .

Qualifications of Project Team General Qualifications Core Team includes 13 MS degrees,6 Ph.D degrees,23 Professional Engineers, and 3 former Senior l Reactor Operators (SROs)

Core Team has approximately 25.5 years average experience in the power

! industry Team leader is a Parsons executive h bEi5!tYs'* System esenta#on

Qualifications of Project Team (continued)

• Engineering Disciplines Mechanical Engineering (10) .

Electrical Engineering (5) l Instrument and Control Engineering (4)

Civil / Structural Engineering (3) 1

• Plant Operations and Maintenance (5)

• Probabilistic Risk Assessment (6) ,

i

• Licensing (3)

• Other Specialists (4) i h "f*"*g

,,g, NRC Presentation i

1~ '

t h

i.

t '

l:

i t

l'-

Docket No. 50-336  :

i  !

. .B16358 e

i i

4  :

)

i

,1 -. -

i 1 i 1

\ t i.

I a.

I 1

Attachment 3 ,

4 i

I . Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 t t- ,

4 ,

Resumes of Additional Personnel  ;

eO i

e i t

r a

O uarcn4ee7 I

l T

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  !

B16358\ Attachment 3\Page 1

O ADDITIONAL PROJECT PERSONNEL  ;

EXPERIENCE, EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS Years Degree /

Project Role Title Experience Certification i

i Safety Analysis and PRA Consultant 26 MS Physics BS Physics  ;

BS Chemistry 1 i

Safety Analysis and PRA Manager- Engineering 18 BSCE '

Projects 4

, Safety Analysis and PRA Safety Analysis 24 BSNE/PE l

} Engineer l I

O i

l i

a 5

4 O

l l

(

( ')

P.O. Box 1751 Aiken, S. C. 29802 l

l EXPERIENCE: AHMAD Consultants 1993 to Present Owner of a small engineering and technical consulting firm providing i services to various power generating utilities and other major engineering i firms. Ser ices provided are in the areas of nuclear mechanical engineering, design engineering, waste management (LL & HL radwaste, and hazardous I wastes and D&D), and environmental engineering. Services include  ;

reviewing documents, performing safety analyses, resolving issues (DOE l orders and reg. guides), and providing information on codes and regulations.

Resiew of QA-related documents. Prosided Duke Power Co's Senneca Nuclear station with technict.1 support for developing and reviewing of I design basis documents.

1992 Westinchouse Savannah River Company QOD/ DOE Savannah River Site)

Senior Safety Analysis Engineering Consultant . Reviewed documents on thermal hydraulics analysis and performed safety analysis on NON-LOCA plant transients for initial charge and/or subsequent charges and on system design changes. Reviewed and defined plant technical specification and associated set points that remain within the bounds of the plant NON-LOCA assumptions. Reviewed DOE / Savannah River Site plant (K-Reactor)

,o document on the Safety Evaluation Program (SEP)/ Topic Evaluation Plan V for accident analysis. Reviewed as well as generated supporting documents for ongoing safety analysis and programmatic efforts of the WSRC/SRS, Safety Analysis - transient analysis group. Familiar with the SRS production reactor operations (K-Reactor). Tech. Specs. and safety analysis standards used in safety analysis for Chapter 15 of the Safety Analysis Report (SAR).

Reviewed safety analysis documents on reactor shielding and high level tadioactive material cask / container shieldina. Was involved in the technical review of and develcoment criticality analysis for feasile materials and for SAR chanter VI Familiar with MARY code for SRS K-Reactor.

1990-91 NUS/Haliburton Environmental Corn.

Senior Consulting (Project) Engineer, Project Engineering and Project Mar gement -involved with various NSSS and BOP modification projects for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (BG&E) and H.D. Robinson Nuclear Power Plant (CP&L). At Calvert Cliffs, worked in the areas of safety injection system, NSSS sampling system, AFW system, component cooling water system, and components related to various other safety systems. Reviewed and performed thermal hydraulic calculations for various plant modifications. Was responsible for developing proposals, scoping, project management, and obtaining funds for project implementation.

Familiar with and performed analysis for various LOCA and other accident conditions using RELAP codes.

(v)

- Persons Power Group-9 96 11162 Page1

,,- 6 (Continued) 1990-91 Gilbert / Commonwealth. Inc..

Senior Safety and Licensing Engineer (on contract) to South Carolina Gas and Electric Company's V. C. Summer Nuclear Power Station. Provided consultation and engineering expenise on plant safety and licensing issues.

Reviewed industry operating experience and NRC information bulletins to identify plant operating problems and to provide solutions to resolve them.

Provided expertise in the areas of NSSS, core analysis and balance-of-plant evaluations. Have a sound knowledge of codes and NRC reg. guides.

Reviewed analysis that used RELAP codes. Reviewed safety analysis documents on reactor shielding and high level radioactive material cask / container shielding in regards to plant minor modification. Reviewed SAR documents pertaining to cricality analysis using various codes and models. -

Assigned as a senior contract lead engineer / supervisor to the Tennessee i Valley Authority's Sequoyah Project, to Sacramento Municipal District's Rancho Seco Nuclear Plant, and the Philadelphia Electric Co.'s Peach Bottom Nuclear Plant. The work included performing a review and analysis of reactor safety systems and related calculations; was involved with the i Safety Systcms Functionability Inspection (SSFI). Generated, developed, l and reviewed NSSS and BOP systems operating mode calculations for the l o stress and the structural group. Provided systems modification evaluation d a.id responded to NRC/IE notices. Was also involved in providing information on Equipment Qualification and for the rededication of i commercial grade equipment for nuclear use. Supervised, reviewed, and i

directed the updating of Design Basis Documents.

4 V

- Parsons Power Orc up -

05/ % 17086 Page 2

6(Continued) 1984-88 Westinchouse Electric Corn.

Senior Level Contract / Project Engineer, Fluid Systems Design Department -

Developed detailed design information for the fluid systems and thermal hydraulics associated with the NSSS and the waste process systems for the nuclear reactors supplied by Westinghouse at Byron, Braidwood, Calloway, South Texas project, Shearon Harns, TVA (Watts Bar and the Sequoyah plants), Comanche Peak, and Seabrook. Performed detailed calculation and analysis and reviewed system perf ances and Emergency Operating Procedures for safety shutdown / n ng accident conditions. Performed calucations on fire hazards analayo .nd safety plant shutdown for Appendix ,

R program for the South Texas Project. Reviewed and responded to audit i findings on valve and pump performance functional requirements, and provided data on NRC/IE-related questions for specific LOCA conditions.

Worked on I&C and electrical separation aspects, revised system descriptions and flow diagrams, issued ECNs, reviewed and updated design documents, and re.iewed and developed plant operating procedures. Also v.>orked in the areas of equipment qualification and re-dedication of commercial grade equipment for nuclear use. Was responsible for the fire protection modification of one of these plants.

As Senior Engineering Consultant was assigned to TVA's Watts Bar project.

Reviewed analysis and performed evaluation of the plant nuclear safety

(]

V systems. Was responsible for the Appendix R and fire protection program review from the nuclear safety systems and the~ electrical and I&C aspects.

Generated, developed, and reviewed NASSS, thermal hydraulic calculations and analysis. Reviewed NSSS operating mode procedures and design basis documents. Reviewed safety analysis documents on reactor shielding and high level radioactive material cask / container shielding and criticality calculations.

1981-84 Consumers Power Co.

Lead Engineer in the technical support department - Was involved with pre-operational startup, testing, and operation support activities. Served as reactor engineer for one year. Developed startup physics test procedures and performed modifications on the reactor canal and the pool area lighting systems. Supervised radioactive materials handling, fuel receipt and storage.

Was involved in performing analysis and study of spent fuel rack and radioactive (HL & L1) materials cask shielding requirements. Provided licensing expertise to the Reactor Engineering Group. Supervised the development and the implementation of the plant Q-List procedures and the Q-list data base for the pre-operational and the operational phases.

, Reviewed SAR documents pertaining to criticality analysis using various codes and models. Was involved in reviewing thermal hydraulic Calculations and documents as a systems engineer.

O V

Parsons Power Group -

05/96-170M Page 3

a 6 (Continued) ,

O l

l Plant Technical Department Nuclear Industry Experience I Coordinator / Supervisor - Reviewed Licensing Event Reports (LER),

Significant Event Reports (SER), and Significant Operating Event Reports (SOER), and NRC/IE bulletins to identify probable problem areas prior to plant startup. Earlier, served as mechanical Level III startup engineer for the i systems engmeermg group.

l Plant Equipment Data Base and Advanced Maintenance Management Coordinator / Supervisor - Was responsible for the development and i implementation of the program. Performed technical review and supervised '

the input of data of reliability-related non-nuclear equipment.

i 1976 - 1980 EG&G Idaho Inc. (DOE INEL)

Project Engineer - Technical Suppon Department, Power Burst Facility - )

Was senior engineer for Aerojet Nuclear and EG&G Idaho at the DOE test 1 reactor site (PSF). Participated in conducting thermal fuel behavior tests.

Was project engineer to the Technical Suppon Branch on major and minor plant modification on the reactor safety systems. Supervised and directed detailed performance and analysis and calculations review and upgrade of l systems. Supervised Plant Waste Management Group. Was responsible for l three major plant projects for high level and low level radwaste and chemical  ;

waste systems. Generated proposals and feasibility reports; provided pd engineering judgements; procured funding; implemented, controlled, and provided direction to these projects. Was responsible for plant HVAC system and related plant FSAR updates. Initiated and designed for approval the constmetion of radwaste resin disposal casks for transponation and disposal of high-level radioactive resins for the facility site. Other assignments included system startup and testing in conjunction with reactor systems modifications and containment lead rate test and related modification test. Was project engineer for the development design and the construction of shielded cask for the transportation and storage of high level radioactive depleted resins used for reactor coolant purification system.

> 14 - 1975 Cochran Western Coro.

Contract and Staff Engineer - Was responsible for mechanical design and fluid power engineering and stress analysis for cargo handling and ground support transport projects for the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force Performed chemical analysis for verification of proper welding performed as required per Mil. Specs Was involved in mechanical design work and analysis for a Chinese shibuilding project.

1971 - 1973 Olson Bodies /Grumman Com.

Mechanical Engineer - Performed mechanical design and analysis on fabrication and tooling for automotive buses, health units, and utility vans.

, O

(

- Persons Poww Group -

05/96-17086 Page 4

l c ..

(Continued) v Supervised a small engineering group, 1970 International Research and Development Corn. l Analytical Chemist - Performed analytical work, and developed method  !

studies for new chemical products, compounds, and pesticides.

East Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority Assistant Technical Officer - R.esponsible for residential and commercial  !

power distribution, sales and planning section. Supervised 50 employees.

EDUCATION: B.S., Physics (Honors), University of Dacca l B.S. Chemistry, University of Dacca l M.S. - Physics, University of Dacca  !

Post Graduate Studies in Physics towards Ph.D., University of Oregon,  !

Eugene OR, and Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI d

.o

- Parsons Power Group -

05/96-17086 Page 5

i MM O PreJect recs ic > ce s it t Over 20 years experience in the Nuclear Pow tr Industry with ever increasing experience in the '

areas of engineering and management.

EXPERIENCE: GPU Nuclear Cornon tion. TMI Nuclear Station. Middletown. Pa.

1989-96 Manager, Engineering Projects / Technical Functions TMI (1989-1996) -

Managed 200 projects totaling $20M at TMI and Saxton Nuclear Stations.

Managed the Design Engineering function for 90% of these projects.

Increased the total dollar value of work by 300% during this period with no increase in staffing. Achieved personnel proficiency and process improvements such that the value of the averaged project increased 200%

during this period. Supervised 9 Project / Design Engineers. '

l Significant projects include:

l TMI-1 Power Uprate - Project to raise the plant output by up to 8%.

One year, $2M feasibility study on schedule and under budget. Directed overall activities of seventy-five GPUN personnel and several engineering support firms formed into 6 teams.

TMI-l Security Upgrades - $1M plant upgrade project to protect against terrorist attack by land-based vehicle. Project completed on schedule and i n within budget and consistent with GPU Nuclear CEO commitments to l U PA Governor's Office. Briefed PA state officials and local media on implementation. Served as technical advisor to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), Washington, DC for security system design issues.

Natural Draft Cooling Tower Study - Developed and initiated project to evaluate the long term structural integrity of the TMI cooling tower fill system and develop recommendations to optimize the life of these structures valued at $25M.

Expanded business to provide Project Management and Engineering support beyond the local area. Managed Design Engineering suppolt for modifications and studies performed at Oyster Creek, Homer City, Warren and Seneca Generating Stations (western PA and NJ). Provided design engineering support to Parsons Power for security upgrades at 4 nuclear l sites operated by Entergy Operations in Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi. l Served as alternate Project Engineering member of the TMI Plant Project j Integration Team. Scope included the project prioritization and approval functions for the TMI capital and specific O&M budgets valued at $30M per

, operating cycle.

Facilitated development of Engineering Projects Department Vision Statement. This included initial development at TMI with followon expansion to include Projects Department personnel at both Oyster Creek g Nuclear Generating Station and the Parsippany, NJ, Headquarters location.

l v 1

- Pafsons Power Group -

9 96-11162 Page1

1

- l M(Continued)

The result of this effort has been a strengthened management of project resources to improve quality, responsiveness and value.

1981-89 Plant Analysis Manager, TMI Staffed & directed the TMI-1 Shift Technical Advisor (STA) Program. This program, a lesson learned from the TMI Accident, assigned Engineers to the operating shifts to provide real time technical support to plant operation. Developed training concept a0d learning objectives for the STA Training Program. The training program 's approximately 1 year long, with STA certification provided by a Senior Management Examining Board. This program has been accredited by the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations. Co-facilitated Kepner-Tregoe Problem Analysis & Decision Making module presented in the training program. Supervised 9 Engineers.

Developed, in concert with corporate engineering, the TMI-1 Plant Performance Monitoring Program. Program included evaluation of overall plant, system, and component performance associated with operation of the TMI-l Nuclear Station. Compared actual performance with that predicted by computer models showing ideal (target) performance level. Identified deviations from expected performance and developed corrective actions to return plant operation to design conditions.

(q

_j Managed operating experience review program. Reviewed significant events at US nuclear plants to determine applicability oflessons learned to TMI-1.

Identified and implemented preventive actions as needed. Interfaced with other US utilities and the Institute ofNuclear Power Operations (INPO).

Developed program to assess TMI-l performance during unplanned shutdowns. Conducted post shutdown review and presented results to plant and corporate senior management. Focal point for Technical Functions Division concurrence with plant restart following unplanned shutdowns.

1980-89 GPUN representative to the Babcock & Wilcox Owners Group (B&WOG)

Transient Assessment Committee (Chairman 1983-84)- Primary architect of Reactor Trip Reduction Program. Lead data collection and evaluation tasks.

Chaired Committee meetings of 6 utilities, and reactor system designer, that prioritized actions and developed programmatic approach to reduce the frequency ofunplanned shutdowns. Presented program to Executive Committee and awarded funding for implementation. Program contributed to 85% reduction in trip frequency and improved transient response at B&WOG plants.

Chaired followon programs to review plant response for complex transients and recommended actions to improve plant post-trip transient response.

Evaluated program implementation at 3 B&WOG utility sites. Team Leader n for evaluation at Davis-Besse. Briefed Nuclear Regulatory Commission U

- Parsons Power Group-05/96-17086 Page 2

i n 6(Continued)

U ,

(NRC) Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) as part of safety review of B&WOG plants.

1979-81 Plant Analysis Engineer, TMI Developed functional design requirements for TMI-l computer system software to support operations and maintenance during normal and emergency operating modes. Developed human interface requirements and conceptual design to meet these requirements. Trained operations and maintenance personnel on system design and use.

Project Engineer TMI-l Control Room Design Review (CRDR) -

Coordinated with prime contractor (MPR Associates), human factors consultants, and GPU Nuclear operations, maintenance, and engineering personnel to ensure effective planning, logistical support, and evaluation for the TMI-1 CRDR project. Lead GPU Nuclear interface with Nuclear Regulatory Commission for inspection of re-designed control room. Briefed PA state and congressional elected officials and their staff on technical aspects of design review and design. Briefed local and national media on project and re-design activities.

1974-79 United States Navv Project Manager, Enlisted Training Programs, Naval Operations, Washington, D.C. Responsible for planning, resource programming and

(]m execution monitoring for Advanced and Specialized Skills Training Programs for US Navy. Total scope 1000 training programs with an annual expenditure of $250M.

Division Officer in Engineering and Operations Departments aboard Nuclear Powered Submarine. Certified as ChiefEngineer Officer.

EDUCATION: B.S., Civil Engineering, Tulane University,1974 U.S. Navy Nuclear Training Program,1975 GPU Executive Development Program - The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania Deming Management Methods Accident / Incident Investigation Workshop (EG&G Services)

Kepner-Tregoe Problem Analysis / Decision Making Course a

v

- Persons Power Group-0$/96-17086 Page 3

O Safety Analysis Engineer

' (v) i Experienced in evaluation of normal and emergency offsite radiological consequences using various mathematical models. Experience in thermofluid applications and other safety analyses for major power generating facilities.

EXPERIENCE: Parsons Power (formerly Gilbert / Commonwealth) since 1973 1 1973 to Present Continuing Services Project Engineer - Susquehanna Steam Electric Station I and R. E. Ginna Project - Responsible for all analysis performed within the  :

Applied Engineering Analysis Department. l 1

Safety Analysis Engineer - Analyzed and evaluated plant design using digital computer techniques in the following areas:

Radiological Analyses South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Nuclear Station - Performed  !

FSAR Chapter 15 off-site dose assessment at power uprate conditions. I Pennsylvania Power & Light, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station -

Performed radiological impact assessment for power uprate.

Evaluated post-accident doses received by control room operators and off-site boundary doses for:

'C'- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2 South Caroliria Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Korea Electric Power Company, Ko-Ri, Unit 2 l

Philadelphia Electric Company, Peach Bottom, Units 2 & 3 - Performed accident analysis of the radwaste building extension for a Safety Evaluation Report.

Rochester Gas & Electric, R. E. Ginna Station - Performed source evaluation and shielding design for all volatile treatment systems.

Evaluated environmental profiles for equipment qualification for:

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Station, Unit 3 Thermofluid Analyses South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Nuclear Station - Performed thermal hydraulic assessments for postulated. accidents following power uprate.

V

- Persons Power Group f 09/93-1W/> Page1 l

1 l

i g 6 (Continued)

V Pennsylvania Power & Light, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station -

Performed thermal hydraulic assessments for postulated accidents following power uprate.

Perry, Unit 1 and Three Mile Island, Unit 1; Crystal River, Unit 3 and i Waterford, Unit 3 - Evaluate transient wave acceleration forces within ~

nuclear plant piping systems.

Evaluate steady-state and transient thrust and jet impingement forces for structural plant design for:

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Station, Unit 3 l Rochester Gas & Electric, R. E. Ginna Station Philadelphia Electric Company, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 & 3 - Evaluated the hardened vent line size.

Performed steady-state and transient heat transfer analyses in suppon of system design, station blackout, and equipment qualification documentation for:

)

(V Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Station, Unit 3 Pennsylvania Power & Light, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Evaluate subcompanment pressure / temperature response and safety equipment thermal response to pipe rupture for:

Cleveland Electric illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, i Unit 1 Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Station, Unit 3 South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Korea Electric Power Company, Ko-Ri, Unit 2 Electric Utilities of Slovenia and Croatia, Krsko Evaluate mass and energy release from pipe mpture for:

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Korea Electric Power Company, Ko-Ri, Unit 2 Rochester Gas & Electric, R. E. Ginna Station Performed both steady-state and transient hydraulic analyses for numerous nuclear (PWR/BWR) and non-nuclear systems for:

\_

l l

- Got,.n/ common nn -

09/93A0010 Page 2 i

)

6(Continued)

O Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Perry Nuciear Power Plant, Unit 1 Rochester Gas & Electric, R. E. Ginna Station Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Station, Unit 3 South Carolina Electric & Gas, V.C. Summer Station Public Service Electric & Gas, Hope Creek Generating Station Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River, Unit 3 - Performed ASME ,

Section XI hydraulic margin assessment analyses for safety related systems. l l

t t

j J

4 4

)

1

- Gdtoft/CommerwweaNh -

09/93A0010 Page 3

n M(Continued)

(J I '

Other Desie_n Anal _yses Electric Power Research Institute - Study evaluating impact on thermodynamic cycle performance when retrofitting the "High Velocity Separator", a moisture removal device, on nuclear power plant turbine cycles.

1 British Petroleum, Grangemouth - Wrote computer program to simulate the Grangemouth fluid catalytic cracking unit as a training tool.

Western Area Power Administration - Building energy analysis using digital computer code DOE-2.0 for the design of new control complex building.

Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River, Unit 3 - Evaluation of hazard to control room personnel due to toxic gas release.

EDUCATION: B.S., Nuclear Engineering, Pennsylvania State University,1973 I Additional Courses:

Introduction to Enviromnental Protection, produced by NUS, Combustion Engineering, and The Pennsylvania State University Two-Phase Fluid Flow, Drexel University,1978 Fundamentals of Management C)

. L./

REGISTRATION: Professional Engineer - Pennsylvania SOCIETIES: American Society of Mechanical Engineers l

l

[

I l N/

- G61 beet /Commorweenh -

09/93A0010 l' age 4 l

i j

Docket No. 50-336 816358 l

1 Attachment 4 -

Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2 Future Work Restrictions, ICAVP Work Location, and Financial Independence I

i i

l l

l j

i 1

1 0' March 1997  ;

l i

i i

i U.S. Nucirr Regulttory Commission  !

B16358\ Attachment 4\Page 1 O Millstone Unit No. 2  !

Parsons Work Restrictions, ICAVP Work Location, and Financial Independence l e Restrictions on Parsons Power from Performing Future Work In NNECO's letter to the NRC recommending Parsons Power as the ICAVP contractor for Millstone Unit No. 2 and in the presentation to the NRC on l March 18,1997, NNECO indicated that Parsons Power would be contractually i restricted from performing or seeking new work at Millstone for 12 months following completion of the Independent Corrective Action Verification Program (ICAVP). In order to ensure the independence of the ICAVP effort, Parsons Power will be restricted from seeking work at any Northeast Utilities facility for a period of 12 months following completion of the ICAVP at Millstone Unit No. 2.

Should an individual team member leave the ICAVP project prior to the end of the project, they will still be subject to these conditions until twelve months after the ICAVP project ends. If Parsons is approved by the NRC, NU's list of approved quality suppliers will be revised to reflect this restriction.

• Location of Parsons Power for ICAVP Work The Parsons Power Group will conduct the majority of the Millstone Unit No. 2 l lCAVP work at its offices (formerly Gilbert / Commonwealth) in Reading, PA.

Some work will be conducted locally at or near the Millstone site. Local work will be monitored by the NRC Staff. A staging area for local work has been established in Old Lyme, CT.

. FinancialIndependence of Parsons Power 1 l

The Parsons Corporation, the parent of Parsons Power Group, Inc., is totally owned by the employees through the PARSONS ESOP. The ESOP does not invest in outside companies. The PARSONS 401K program is administered by 3 the American Express Corporation, and offers individual employees the opportunity to invest in five (5) different mutual funds. The Parsons Corporation matches a portion of the employees contribution to this program, but the employee decides in which mutual funds these company contributions will be placed. No employee of the Parsons Corporation has control of the investment decisions of any of the five funds involved in the 401K program.

O l

)

O v

CORPORATE OVERVIEW Parsons Corpore. tion, one of the world's Our latest annual report, which sununarizes largest international engineering and the recent activities of the corporation, is construction organizations, provides a wide provided in Exhibit 1-1.

range of services for private industry and government through its operating groups. Our Through wholly-owned subsidiaries, Parsons proud heritage of excellence began in 1944, Provides a wide range of planning, design, and today Parsons Corporation is the largest engineering, construction, and progrsm 100% employee-owned firm ofits kind in the management services to clients in government United States. and private industry worldwide, as depicted in Figure 1-1. Our worldwide staff consists of The following briefly describes Parsons approximately 10,000 managers, engineers, corporate structure and organization. and support personnel.

,s22 t

' ~

< f> a>, s, , K 7 -

g)

' < o2EL ', d jdN.%

Mainsg$, >

w/ -

r~d ..< . 7.a.

W

> sm c. .-: .v. <

$a *

%nQg?g ' j- j$n-a q

h,*k;@E!ML. gj%f

<x, -

99 y

m.  : m< a;> , .

"F W h a 3'y D '<

sne Aseme!On g g gf"%$F;[@

1. "~

. mm m 9 emmen. s m onneemauer,b)' e ' > ,

^R W .,t' &' v, 7 ,.

i h .'s ,3 > >

~

ag 'c %sammar~jn-  ;

11, e ' '-

-.a >.wm. , - -

' J,'<,e MavC ~ l Sh l ,l 5 4L >5n >;'

~ ,

i I

I g Figure 1 Parsons Worldwide Engineering and Construction Services

' I

'/

'~.

Parsons was ranked the top global design firm Limited, Parsons International and Saudi by Engineering News Record, the industry's Arabian Parsons Limited.

leading trade publication. The ranking, based on combined dcmestic and international 1995 billings was announced in the July 22,1996 issue. ENR also named Parsons the top U.S.

design firm for the second year in row.

Parsons Corporation is a recognized leader in the oil and gas, petroleum processing, chemical, power, environmental, water resources, aviation, and pulp and paper industries, as well as infrastrue:ure, government, industrial and community development and ground transportation.

t

• Parsons lafrastructure & Technology Group Inc., incorporating the resources of the former Systems Division of The Ralph M. Parsons Company; Parsons O Engineering Science, Inc.; Harland Banholomew & Associates, Inc.; and the industrial units from Parsons Main, Inc.

CORPORATE ORGANIZA TION and Gilbert l Commonwealth, Inc.

Recently, Parsons Corporation restmetured its e Parsons Power Group Inc., representing organization to build upon a historically a combination of the power-related diversified operating approach, and focus even capability of Gilbert / Commonwealth, Inc.,

more sharply on four distinct market sectors, and Parsons Main, Inc.

or Global Business Units. These Global l Business Units have responsibility for our e Parsons Transportation Group Inc.,  !

worldwide project execution, as well as for consisting of DeLeuw, Cather &

maintaining state-of-the-art technology and Company; Barton-Aschman Associates, resource capability. Each of these units Inc.; and Steinnm Boynton Gronquiest &

proudly carries the Parsons name: Birdsall.

. Parsons Process Group Inc., comprising Parsons overall corporate structure is shown the former Petroleum & Chemical Division in Figure 1-2.

of The Ralph M. Parsons Company; Parsons S.I.P. Inc.; and the process industry-related activities of Parsons o 1 2- l

~. -.

O O O Parsons Corporation PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 1 James F. McNulty EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT FOR OPERATIONS Ray W. Judson CHIEF FINANCIAL GENERAL HUMAN PUBLIC  !

OFFICER COUNSEL RESOURCES RELATIONS ,

Curtrs A. Bower Gary L Stone Shiriey Gaufin Ron E. Wildermuth  ;

4 '

Senior Vee Presdent Senior Vee Presdent Vice Presdent Manager r

I I I E PARSONS PROCESS PARSONS POWER PARSONS PARSONS i k

GROUP GROUP TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE &

GROUP TECHNOI OGY GROUP Wmiam E. Hall Robert S. O'Neil Frank A. DeMartino W. Kendall Burkhart 1

" President i j

i i

PARSONS LATIN PARSONS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AMERICA I

mm en Ralph R. DiSibio J. Douglas Pitts  !

President Presdent PARSONS PARSONS EUROPEI CONSTRUCTORS M'DDLE EAST AFRICA / SOUTH ASIA  !

mm e Michael W. D'Antuono Dean K Allen Presdent President PARSONS CONSTRUCTION PARSONS ASIA SERVICES PACIFIC mm m i John G. Moren Peter F. Hedges  !

Presdent President  ;

824608-11002 3 i i

PARSONS PROCESS GROUP INC. Saudi Arabian Parsons Limited (SAPL),is O- headquartered in Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia, I Parsons Process Group Inc. (PPGI) employs and provides management, design, over 2,000 people worldwide and provides a procurement, construction and program diverse range of services to a global roster of management services for petroleum, chemical, clients in the petroleum and chemical sector. infrastructure, mining and aviation projects in This includes design, engineering, Saudi Arabia.

, procurement, construction and project management for the petroleum production, Parsons International L,imited, with offices refining, sulfur management, oil and gas in Manila, Philippines provides a full range of production, gas processing, chemicals and services for the oil & gas, refining, petrochemicals industries. Petrochemical, and irfrastructure sectors. i l PPGl has majorfull-service design centers Latinoamericana de Ingeneria, S.A. de l in Houston, Texas; Pasadena, California; C.V.(LATISA), headquartered in Mexico i London, England; andManila, Philippines. City, Mexico, offers services from feasibility studies through engineering, procurement, and l construction supervision for natural resources, industrial and infrastructure projects in Mexico and Latin America.

j Parsons de Colombia, with offices in Bogota, Colombia, provides a full range of ,

,h,-~ engineering, procurement and construction l l

services in Colombia and surrounding regions.

4

! The following Parsons companies and 1 afliliates are established to perform work in specific countries or regions.

, Parsons Engineers, Ltd. (PEL), is l

headquartered in Kuwait City, Kuwait and Proyeparsons, with offices in Caracas,  ;

provides project management, construction Venezuela, provides project management,  !

management, engineering, procurement, construction management, engineering, ,

construction, training and other services to the procurement, and construction services to a l petroleum, chemical, and oil & gas industries. wide range ofindustries including oil & gas,  !

petroleum refining and petrochemicals.

'O

1 i

(

s Parsons Polytech, Inc., a Japanese corporation in consortium with Shimizu Parsons Engineering Science is headquartered in Pasadena, California. Few Construction Company, provides program organizations in the industry can match the management, construction management and environmental experience and diverse construction services in the Pacific Rim. capabilities of Parsons ES. The company specializes in a complete spectrum of I 4

PARSONS INFRASTRUCTURE AND environmental engineering services includmg '

] TECHNOLOGY GROUP INC. water and waste water treatment, hazardous waste management, nuclear and mixed waste i

The Parsons Infrastructure and Technology decontarnination and decommissioning, water

, Group Inc. (Parsons I&T), headquartered in supply, laboratory services, marine waste Pasadena, California, was formed in 1995 by disposal, solid waste management, and air l combining the Systems Division of the Ralph pollution control.

M Parsons Company and other related subsidiaries. The company, which provides Harland Bartholomew & Associates,Inc.

services to clients in government, industry and Provides engineering and planning consulting commerce, consists of the following divisions: services. This includes urban and regional planning, military master planning, e Aviation environmental assessment and impact studies,

e Federal transportation planning, traffic studies, e Industrial (Manufacturing) engineering design, site planning, and campus

. Pl anning.

Industrial (Environmental) 1 "O e Infrastructure / Water Resources V PARSONS POWER GROUP, INC.

, Services are provided to both public and I

private sectors. Industries served include Parsons Power Group Inc. was formed in  ;

defense and aerospace, water and sewage 1995 from the merger of two Parsons i 1 treatment, telecommunications, education and Corporation subsidiaries: Gilbert / l i medical, communication, power, Commonwealth, Inc. and Parsons Main, Inc.

transportation, environmental and waste Gilbert / Commonwealth became a Parsons .

4 management. Corporation subsidiary in July 1995, after  !

serving the power industry for over 90 years. 1 Parsons Main, formerly Charles T. Main, has been part ofParsons Corporation since 1985 i and has been serving the power industry for over 100 years.

Parsons Power Group Inc. provides consulting I

services, design, engineering, procurement, I

project management, construction and construction management to clients

. throughout the world.

Industries or facilities served include electric

>q power generating plants, cogeneration plants, V

e hydroelectric facilities, other types of comprehensive planning, management, design independent power generation, power and constmetion support services for project transmission and distribution systems, from concept through constmetion and industrial and process plants, laboratory operations.

facilities, commercial buildings, municipal buildings, pulp, paper and forest industries, printing and publishing facilities, and enviromnental and hazardous materials projects.

l l

I a

l l

l l

PARSONS CONSTRUCTORS INC. i O Parsons Constmetors Inc., (PCI),

headquartered in Pasadena, California, is a Parsons Corporation subsidiary. The Company provides construction services to other Parsons companies as well as to government and private industry. Services provided by PCI include direct hire plant Parsons Power Inc. has the leading edge constmetion, construction management and crpertise in variegs technologies, including supervision, quality assurance / quality control, fh.idized bed boilers, fuel cells, coal field inspection and material supervision, gasification, high and low temperature gas safety management, labor relations and labor cleanup and environmental, negotiations, planning, scheduling, and logistics support, and constructability PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP assessment.

INC. )

PARSONS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,  ;

Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. was INC*

formed in 1995 by the consolidation of De Leuw, Cather Co., Barton-Aschman Parsons Construction Services, Inc. is a I Associates, Inc. and Steinman, three former subsidiaries of the Parsons Corporation. The Parsons Corporation subsidiary, based in )

Houston, Texas. The Company provides company is a leader in the international construction services on a merit shop basis for i transportation business and provides Parsons and other companies on refining, 6-

petrochemical, industrial development, and s public works projects.

PARSONS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Parsons Development Company is headquartered in Washington, D.C., a center ofinternational financing and lending institutions and multinational banking. The Company is dedicated exclusively to project development and assists clients around the globe with innovative financing for various types of projects, including infrastructure, power generation, industrial facilities, transportation systems, and water supply and treatment.

O O

i I

i O i i

THE PARSON CORPORATION FINANCIALS '

Parsons Corporation and all ofits subsidiary companies, including Parsons Power Group Inc., are )

privately held under an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), the organization's financial information is not publicly released. Although the organization's financial information is not made available for subsidiary companies or publicly released, the following audited financial information is provided:

1. Average Annual Sales During the Past Five Years $1.479.000.00 l

2. Estimated Billable Sales this Year $1.300.000.00 i

l I

i O  !

i l )

l t

a 4 4 .

lg j

. . .~